Chaos Dreadnoughts

[CuznP]

Playing With Chaos Dreadnoughts and the Joys it May Bring

 

Unfortunately the rules for Chaos Dreadnoughts are confusing ;) and to make matters worse some players confuse rules from previous editions with those in effect today. Also, many people claim that there is a RAW vs. RAI situation in play here and dismiss the issue, but I think it is more a case of simply, “What are the Rules?”

 

I think Chaos Dreads are not as bad they seem. (<--- the only opinion in this post)

The only problem is that 33.333% of the time, you don’t get to choose exactly what they do, but the things they DO do in that 33.333% of the time can be pretty great!

So Let’s have a look at Dreadnoughts or, less specifically, Walkers in general…

 

Moving:

Walkers move as Infantry:

They can walk in the movement phase

They can run in the shooting phase

They can charge in the assault phase

Just like infantry… simple! except, we need to make certain that we are facing where we want to be facing before moving on, for reasons we will soon see.

 

Shooting:

“When firing, pivot the walker on the spot so that its guns are aimed at the target” BRB p. 72

Therefore

1. Choose a target

2. Pivot towards the target

3. Fire

Simple??? Not so much.

Choosing a target has very specific rules on BRB p. 16. In order to select an enemy unit as a target, you must have Line of Sight to it.

So, we need Line of Sight. How do we do that?

Well, since our Chaos Dreadnought is a vehicle, and there are no rules to the contrary in the Walkers section of the BRB, we must use Vehicle rules for determining LOS, found on BRB p. 58, which states that we draw LOS from the vehicles’ weapons’ arc of fire.

Now that we have determined our target, using our guns’ LOS, we pivot so that both of our guns are able to shoot at that unit and we fire!

 

Assault:

Walkers assault and fight like Infantry according to BRB p. 73.

Not too tricky here.

 

Now onto OUR Dreadnoughts and their crazy CRAZED rule, particularly “Fire Frenzy.”

So here is Fire Frenzy “The Chaos Dreadnought may not move or assault this turn. At the beginning of the shooting phase it must pivot on the spot towards the closest visible unit (friend or foe) and fire…” CSM p 40

 

Movement:

In the Movement Phase we can’t move. But, thank goodness we are still vehicles! We can pivot freely without moving. BRB p.57.

 

Shooting:

Then in the Shooting Phase we must:

1. Determine the closest visible unit

2. Pivot towards it

3. Fire everything twice

So the only way for something to be visible is for it to be in LOS and the only way to determine LOS from a walker is from its guns. (as described above)

So we find our closest target within our line of sight, (be it friend or foe) and we pivot towards it and fire our guns twice.

 

Assault:

In the Assault Phase we can do nothing but relax.

 

Now before you go off and say "That's Not Right!" :P to anything I have typed above, count to 10 and then go and check for yourself... then if I have missed anything, let us know! ^_^

[Night Lord Dred]

As much as I love the dreadnoughts, I disagree about this. However, Im not going to get into who's right or who's wrong, because it's irrelevant (and it's been argued 1000 times).

 

The fact is, W40K is a game between players....real people. It doesnt matter if you may be right, because at a tournament, or even a local friendly game, there is no guarantee that the "general consensus" will vote your way. The fact is, people generally play it as the closest unit, period.

 

If Im playing in a tournament, I do not want this ruling to be up in the air and find out it's been ruled the other way - that would greatly affect the strategy. This is why I always assume a rule like this will not go my way - that way I can plan my moves/ list strategy ahead of time without this unknown factor in the back of my mind.

[Chimerical]

There IS no settling this once and for all until GW FAQs it. I.e. Re-releases the post-codex release FAQ. I.e. hell freezes over.

 

Because the rule just IS ambiguous.

 

I think your interpretation is the appropriate one, but others, and importantly the INAT FAQ, disagree.

 

Best not to get our undies in a twist over it. Take solace in that Gav Thorpe will not touch another 40k codex ever again.

[chillin]

Take solace in that Gav Thorpe will not touch another 40k codex ever again.

 

:P ;) :yes: :D ;) :lol:

[Dan The Deamon]

Man, you put some work into your post and do mean well, but Raw wins the day on this one. This has been argued 1000 times and no matter what kind of spin you put on it dreadnoughts aren't in our favor.

 

It comes down to the walkers LOS, not the weapons'. The Dnought like infantry can see 360. It can only shoot 180, but it states that it will pivot towards the closest visible unit. If we were going off weapons arc there would be no pivot necessary because what he can see, he can shoot. This simply isn't the case, as much as that stinks.

[Larendard]

I think this rule should be interpreted by imagination - just think about that big robot-guy going trigger-happy...he pivots on the spot like a madman looking for it's prey. so it's going to target the closest visible target (everything that isn't hidden behind other stuff or units), gets angry and unloads his weapons like there's no tomorrow. Same with close combat frenziness...freaked-out robot looks around and whatever seems to be within range gets beaten up *tee-hee*

Your interpretation isn't bad, but it uses the game mechanics rather than true reason and imagination. It is however stated in the main rulebook of 40k that, whenever in doubt about some rules one should simply imagine how it would work out "in the real world" (if 40k were real...).

[Drudge Dreadnought]

This debate comes down to what "visible" means - what the walker can see, or not invisible?

 

It comes down to the walkers LOS, not the weapons'. The Dnought like infantry can see 360. It can only shoot 180, but it states that it will pivot towards the closest visible unit. If we were going off weapons arc there would be no pivot necessary because what he can see, he can shoot. This simply isn't the case, as much as that stinks.

 

I do not believe this is correct. Can you cite a page number? If memory serves, there is no longer anything stating that infantry can see 360 (there was in 4th). This is all replaced by TLOS measuring from the model's eyes. It also states specifically that vehicles can see what is in their arc of fire. Even if this is not the case for dreads, their eyes are mounted on the front and are only going to see the front 180 or so due to the rest of its body. So either way you look at that its pretty much whats in front of them. Of course, this all assumes the first interpretation of visible.

 

 

My personal stance on this issue is pretty simple: The regular interpretation of Fire Frenzy makes dreads useless peices of slag. The other interpretation makes them just a bad unit. Either way, dreads are still bad. But one interpretation makes them slightly more useable.

[Larendard]

I don't think they're useless, they're just not easy to use :-)

It is crucial that you put the dread cleverly in the right position where it won't attack your own units.

If he get's fire-frenzy while in range to an enemy unit you essentially got twice the firepower - that's awesome! :-D

Deploy him away from your units, hide your stuff behind terrain pieces from dreddys LOS and let him go crazy when he's reached enemy lines ^_^

[Corpse.]

Perks.

 

If the dread starts off the table in Dawn of War or reserves then no roll is made.

 

You could set two dreads side by side with Autocannons, hoping one shakes the other to count it as an opposite result, having extra armor on all of them making stunned result counts as shaken.

 

Using a missile launcher as your ranged weapon while changing the other gun for the melee weapon and so you can pick frag missiles when it fires at you. (I use plague marines and dreads with missile launchers, easy for me to do with scattering blast weapons and me picking which model is under the hole of the blast makes easy missing scatters)

 

Twin melee weapons and keeping it far from your force if you roll a fire frenzy the first or second turn while out of range from the enemy. Or keep it close knowing the bolters wont hurt much, hopefully. Two dreads side by side is best with this one with AV 12 sides.

 

In apocalypse you can just count it as a loyalist dreadnought painted in your armies colors.

 

In Planetstrike you can do the deep strike stratagem thing and drop it near the enemy.

 

 

That's all I can really add other then keep a tough vehicle or unit near the dread. And to keep the dreadnought cheap.

[Dan The Deamon]

You know i'm starting to realize that Cuznp is right.

 

The first thing i will say is that the dreadnoughts were intended to shoot at the closest unit, friend or foe. This is however the actual RAI.

 

RAW is the Dnought can only see 180 degrees. the closest thing we have to a definition for Visible is something we can draw TLOS to, which involves what our models eyes can see. You're right drudge, 360 is gone.

 

I looked in both chaos and Sm codex. neither entry for Dnoughts has the weapons listed as hull, pintle, sponson, or any type of mounting. This leaves the RAW as drawing LOS down the weapon barrel from the mount. Effectively a hull weapon.

 

The RAW is your dnought will fire frenzy on the closest unit within los (180) pivot it's 45 degree arc towards it, and shooting twice.

 

That wasn't their intentions writing the book, but then again, their intentions were to :sweat: that book up. Sadly RAI has become RAW and nobody is willing to budge (not even me for the past 7 months).

[chillin]

RAW is the Dnought can only see 180 degrees. the closest thing we have to a definition for Visible is something we can draw TLOS to, which involves what our models eyes can see.

 

OMG :sweat: ""it must PIVOT on the spot" . Do you not know what pivot means ?

If you can get away with skirting the RAW on somebody, good for you (I guess). I would not try to pull it on someone and I would not let anyone pull it on me.

I would love to be better able to use my dreads, but I'm not going to try and bend and twist the RAW and ingor a word in the RAW so I can play it the way I would rather it be. And that's exactly what all this is, nothing less.

[Drudge Dreadnought]

Chillin, can you explain how the pivoting matters to this at all seeing that the target is determined before you pivot?

[Dan The Deamon]

"it must pivot on the spot towards the closest visible unit"

 

Page 16 Main rule book; "Line of sight must be traced from the eyes of the firing model to any part of the body of at least one of the models in the target unit (for 'body' we mean it's head, torso, legs and arms). Sometimes, all that may be visible of a model is a weapon, an antenna, a banner or some other ornament he is wearing or carrying(including it's wings and tail, even though they are technically part of it's body). In these cases, the model is not visible. These rules are intended to ensure that models do not get penalized for having impressive standards, blades, guns, majestic wings, etc."

 

Chaos codex page 40; Fire Frenzy. At the beginning of the shooting phase it must pivot on the spot towards the closest visible unit (friend or foe) and fire it's weapons at it- Twice! If the chaos dreadnought cannot fire any of it's ranged weapons, treat this result as 2-5 'sane' result instead."

 

page 72 Main rule book; "When firing a walker's weapons, pivot the walker on the spot so that it's guns are aimed at the target (assume that all weapons mounted on a walker can swivel 45 degrees, like hull mounted weapons) and then measure the range from the weapon itself and line of sight from the mounting point of the weapon and along it's barrel, as normal for vehicles. This pivoting in the shooting phase does not count as moving and represents the vastly superior agility or walkers in comparison with other vehicles. Keep in mind however that the walker will probably remain facing in this direction until it's next movement phase, so it's facing will dtermine where it's rear armor is going to be when the enemy returns fire."

 

 

 

Yeah i know what pivot is quite well. A dread that can see something on it's left flank pivots its 45 degree weapon towards it. It doesn't pivot to see the target because what's visible is already decided when you roll.

 

I don't use this against people, and i'd rather not have to get into an argument every time i play a game with someone. I have not, and will not use a Dnought because the rules aren't widely accepted. It doesn't change what's written.

 

Edit to replace entries left out. Should be strike through.

[chillin]

I know Dan cut a few pieces of the rule book as far as LoS 'eyes of model" etc. But I will have to read the rulebook (which I don't have on me) in order to properly retort. I know it sz a gun swivels 45' but the dread can pivot all the way round. I do agree that this is different then the reg rule for how a dread can fire, but that's what makes "special" rules special.

For example if I drop some termi's behind your dread, your dread can certainly pivot around and shot me (durning your turn), it's not like since my termi's are not infront of your dreads eyes, that he can't turn around & shoot me. But like I said I will have to read abit of the rule book before I can decide if you guys are wrong or if I am right :P :D

[Dan The Deamon]

I cut out useless drivel, i will edit my post and put the new stuff in.

 

I'm writing a letter to JJ too.

[Dan The Deamon]

Walkers pivot in the shooting phase towards a target they want to shoot at. They must ensure that the target is in their weapon arc. but doesn't have to be in LOS before they pivot.

 

Same as a tank. In the shooting phase you choose to pivot your weapon arc towards something it cannot see. Tanks LOS is based off their weapons arc. Dreadnought LOS is based off a models eye view.

 

Sane

Walker chooses a target (regardless of line of sight)

Walker Pivots towards said target (to obtain arc of fire, not LOS)

Walker Shoots said target (fun times )

 

Fire frenzy

Walker is forced to determine the closest visible target (in LOS)

walker pivots arc of fire towards closest visible target

walker shoots target twice

[Moress]

If it helps, I use to think with the same train of thought too, but I emailed GW, and they said it pivots and hits the nearest visible unit. So for example, if you have a squad of boyz 5" infront of you, and a squad of termies 1" behind you, the dread will turn completely around and house your termies.

 

The dude who replied (I honostly don't remember who it was, might of been JJ, but not sure) basically said, LoS from a model is different then that of it's guns. The model can practically see everywhere, but it's guns have a limited LoS. Or that was the general jist of the email. Lemme see if I can dig it up.

 

Edit: Found it, It was alot shorter then I remember lol

 

Hello,

 

The Chaos Dreadnought would turn around to fire at the unit behind it if it was the closest unit. Basically it has a 360 degree line of sight, even though it only has a 45 degree arc of fire.

 

 

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

John Spencer

 

Customer Service Specialist

[chillin]

Walkers pivot in the shooting phase towards a target they want to shoot at. They must ensure that the target is in their weapon arc. but doesn't have to be in LOS before they pivot.

 

This pretty much removes ANY doubt I might have had about my position. Even sz dread doesn't have to have LOS b4 the pivot. So it will pivot around, then shot the closest visible target (even if it had started behind them).

I agree that it is worded poorly in the dex, but that doesn't change how dreads pivot & shoot.

Believe me I would love to able to use my dreads more (at all), but this arguement doesn't hold water IMO

[Corpse.]

For the sake of pivoting it is assumed a weapon or the eyes of a model is what you aim from. However a vehicle is a vehicle, regardless of walker status. It only moves as infantry. It turns like a vehicle.

 

Example of a turret. Its aimed forwards. You target something behind it and then turn the turret to face it to derive LoS from it. It can target something behind it because its just in the 360 degree arc of fire? No. It was seen before the turret was turned. Just like pivoting a walker to face the closest unit.

[Drudge Dreadnought]

Basically it has a 360 degree line of sight, even though it only has a 45 degree arc of fire.

 

The problem is this doesn't exist anywhere in the rulebook.

 

Remember, when you ask GW questions you are often going to get answers that rely on their super secret special rulebook that actually has consistent rules. But that isn't the rulebook we all have.

 

Chillin: You still have not explained what pivoting has to do with this at all, since it is a matter of target selection.

[Dan The Deamon]

Walkers pivot in the shooting phase towards a target they want to shoot at. They must ensure that the target is in their weapon arc. but doesn't have to be in LOS before they pivot.

 

This pretty much removes ANY doubt I might have had about my position. Even sz dread doesn't have to have LOS b4 the pivot. So it will pivot around, then shot the closest visible target (even if it had started behind them).

I agree that it is worded poorly in the dex, but that doesn't change how dreads pivot & shoot.

Believe me I would love to able to use my dreads more (at all), but this argument doesn't hold water IMO

 

that was my paraphrasing of the rule, it's not written anywhere in the book.

 

I Stand corrected on the 360 ruling. As of right now corpse makes a good point, but 360 isn't even stated in a vehicle LOS. Vehicles are stated to have LOS from their weapons, who have arcs. You pivot to obtain LOS with a vehicle because weapons arc and los is the same. The question comes down to, do Dnoughts have LOS separate from weapons arc?

 

Oh, and John spencer, customer service specialist , probably thinks there's 7 chaos gods.

[chillin]

Chillin: You still have not explained what pivoting has to do with this at all, since it is a matter of target selection.

 

Read Dan's quote about not having to have LOS before pivoting then picking a target, that explains it just fine. I don't know that I could explain it any more clearly then that. If you don't understand what that has to do with it I'm thinking it's mostly b/c you don't want to, so I don't see the point in trying to expand on or rephrase it.

Cheers :D we'll just have to disagree.

[Drudge Dreadnought]

Chillin: You still have not explained what pivoting has to do with this at all, since it is a matter of target selection.

 

Read Dan's quote about not having to have LOS before pivoting then picking a target, that explains it just fine. I don't know that I could explain it any more clearly then that. If you don't understand what that has to do with it I'm thinking it's mostly b/c you don't want to, so I don't see the point in trying to expand on or rephrase it.

Cheers :D we'll just have to disagree.

 

 

That quote from Dan is talking about the normal shooting sequence. This is not that. This is not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing. This is a matter of people putting forth arguments, then you coming in and practically calling them cheaters because "but they can pivot!", and then refusing to explain what you are actually talking about. I expect more from you than this. At this point i think you are not answering because you've realized you are wrong and are trying to save face.

[Dan The Deamon]

This is what happens in each situation. Fire Frenzy takes place differently than normal shooting. Regardless if the vehicle has 360 degrees or 180, this is how it works.

 

 

Sane

Walker chooses a target (regardless of line of sight)

Walker Pivots towards said target (to obtain arc of fire, not LOS)

Walker Shoots said target (fun times )

 

Fire frenzy

Walker is forced to determine the closest visible target (in LOS)

walker pivots arc of fire towards closest visible target

walker shoots target twice.

 

Now like i said, regardless of how a walkers line of sight is, 360, or 180, that is the sequence.

 

The real definition of this rule comes down to what's in the walkers LOS. It has nothing to do with Pivoting.

 

Chillen, the post that you quoted was not from a rulebook. It was in example of a 'sane' dreadnought shooting terminators behind him.

 

The question comes back to do Dnoughts have LOS separate from weapons arc?

 

Furthermore I'm not doing this to fit Dreadnoughts into my list. I'm doing it to understand the rules better than my opponents. When someone comes at me with a broken interpretation of dreadnoughts i'm not going to scream pivot at them, i will walk them through why exactly it can't happen.

[chillin]

then you coming in and practically calling them cheaters because "but they can pivot!", and then refusing to explain what you are actually talking about. At this point i think you are not answering because you've realized you are wrong and are trying to save face.

 

If I came off as "practically calling some a cheater" that was not my intention, sorry if someone took it that way.

As for me not answering b/c I know I am wrong... I alittle insulted by that. If you prove to me (reasonablly) that I was wrong, I would say "you got me guys, I was wrong". If you think that I feel any need to "save face" to you or anyone else on this forum over a hobby/game you are very wrong. Like I said more then once, I would love to be wrong so I can use my dreads more.

I have already answered your Q, but I will answer one more time, but I think it's a waste of time/words, then I will leave it alone b/c I think no good can come of continue this arguement.

As per dan's quote "Walkers pivot in the shooting phase toward the target they want to shot at", in the case of a fire frenzy dread, they want to shoot at their own troops (if they are the closest). Dan's quote again "but (target) doesn't have to be in LOS before they pivot" meaning dread doesn't have to "see" a target before it pivots, a target (in this case being your own troops if they are closest) can be out of LOS b4 the pivot, but in LOS after the pivot, then are visible and can (thus must) be shot at.

Do not insult me again by saying that I am so petty that I would not answer b/c I knew I was wrong or need to "save face" over a discussion of the rules of a GAME. And it is a matter of agreeing/disagreeing. I have explained why I disagree with this arguement twice (3 times really) and you agree with this arguement, thus disagree with me (as I disagree with you). For you to make more out of it then that is all you. And quite uncalled for. Like I said, I'll not respond to this line again, your accusations are baseless, and it's done as far as I'm concerned. Have a good night.